compile speed on lfs 5.0

mrnobby no at spam.please
Fri May 7 15:55:31 PDT 2004

"Ken Moffat" <ken at> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.58.0405072107530.16315 at ppg_penguin...
On Fri, 7 May 2004, mrnobby wrote:

> Now, gcc-2.95.3 is a rocket compared to any of the gcc-3.3 family.
>But once you've completed pass 1 of binutils and bash, everything is
>using the new compiler anyway so although the elapsed times for these
>first two become much longer, everything else should be 'similar'.  My
>understanding was that *everything* was taking a lot longer.
This could account for a lot of the difference. One other thing though,
RH 7.0 is 386 compiled, the new LFS would be optimized for Pentium-MMX
or wouldn't that make much of a difference?

> The other thing that would slow an old box down is forgetting to use
>swap. but I'm sure you've checked that in `top'.
I had to go and check :-) Yes it is in 'top'. BUT I also checked
/proc/swaps and that looks a little worrying, it says:

Filename        Type        Size    Used    Priority
/dev/hda2       partition   128512  0       1

Should used be 1? Or is that zero indicating the first swap device?


Mr Nobby.

More information about the lfs-support mailing list